LATEST SUMMARIES

BANKING LAW, CORP. GOVERNANCE, CORPORATION & ENTERPRISE LAW, ETHICS & PROFESSIONAL RESPONSIBILITY, SECURITIES LAW
• Siepel v. Bank of America, N.A.

CIVIL PROCEDURE, CIVIL RIGHTS, EVIDENCE, INJURY AND TORT LAW, LABOR & EMPLOYMENT LAW, REMEDIES
• Batiste-Davis v. Lincare, Inc.

CRIMINAL LAW & PROCEDURE, EVIDENCE
• US v. Hudspeth

CRIMINAL LAW & PROCEDURE, HABEAS CORPUS
• Bishop v. Dormire

LATEST SUMMARIES

BANKING LAW, CORP. GOVERNANCE, CORPORATION & ENTERPRISE LAW, ETHICS & PROFESSIONAL RESPONSIBILITY, SECURITIES LAW
Siepel v. Bank of America, N.A., No. 07-1899/07-1906
In an appeal primarily addressing whether the Securities Litigation Uniform Standards Act of 1998 (SLUSA) preempted state-law claims that a trustee breached its fiduciary duty by failing to disclose conflicts of interest in its selection of nationally-traded investment securities, the circuit court finds that SLUSA does preempt. Read more...

CIVIL PROCEDURE, CIVIL RIGHTS, EVIDENCE, INJURY AND TORT LAW, LABOR & EMPLOYMENT LAW, REMEDIES
Batiste-Davis v. Lincare, Inc., No. 06-4206
In a Title VII suit brought against a former employer alleging wrongful termination of employment, judgment for employer is affirmed where: 1) improperly admitted evidence of plaintiff-employer's prior employment discrimination suit did not have a substantial effect on the jury's verdict; and 2) evidence of past mental health treatment was properly admitted, as it was relevant to plaintiff's claim for damages for mental anguish and emotional suffering; and 3) viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the jury verdict, the district court did not err in denying plaintiff's motion for a new trial. Read more...

CRIMINAL LAW & PROCEDURE, EVIDENCE
US v. Hudspeth, No. 07-1632
Conviction for money laundering, conspiracy to distribute pseudoephedrine, and conspiracy to launder money is affirmed over claims of error regarding: 1) denial of a motion to suppress evidence; 2) motions for judgment of acquittal; 3) court's response to jury questions about the elements of money laundering; and 4) jury instructions on the issue of interstate commerce. Read more...

CRIMINAL LAW & PROCEDURE, HABEAS CORPUS
Bishop v. Dormire, No. 07-2341
Dismissal of a petition for habeas relief as untimely is vacated and remanded where: 1) petitioner's properly filed motion to recall the Missouri Court of Appeals' mandate tolled the AEDPA statute of limitations; and 2) although it appeared that petitioner did not meet the requirements for his habeas petition to be considered timely, he may be eligible for equitable tolling. Read more...